CompaRNA - on-line benchmarks of RNA structure prediction methods
Home

Methods
Datasets
Rankings
RNA 2D Atlas

Help
FAQ

Contact us
RSS feeds
Twitter

Table of contents:

  1. Overview

  2. Performance Plots

  3. Performance of CentroidAlifold(seed) - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

  4. Performance of Afold - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

  5. Compile and download dataset for CentroidAlifold(seed) & Afold [.zip] - may take several seconds...


Overview

Metric CentroidAlifold(seed) Afold
MCC 0.572 > 0.495
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.511 ± 0.096 < 0.524 ± 0.107
Sensitivity 0.366 < 0.458
Positive Predictive Value 0.899 > 0.539
Total TP 355 < 445
Total TN 246097 > 245666
Total FP 57 < 456
Total FP CONTRA 14 < 66
Total FP INCONS 26 < 315
Total FP COMP 17 < 75
Total FN 616 > 526
P-value 5.1503931209e-08

^top




Performance plots


  1. Comparison of performance of CentroidAlifold(seed) and Afold. Positive Predictive Value (PPV) is plotted against sensitivity. Each dot represents a single test of each method. See tables below for raw data (individual counts for CentroidAlifold(seed) and Afold).

  2. Average Matthews Correlation Coefficients (MCC) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were plotted for different RNA families, for which at least 3 members were present in the benchmarking dataset. 'n' denotes the number of MCCs used to calculate the average and CI. See tables below for raw data (individual counts for CentroidAlifold(seed) and Afold).

  3. Comparison of average Matthews Correlation Coefficients (MCCs) for CentroidAlifold(seed) and Afold. The whiskers correspond to 95% confidence intervals (CIs). 'n' denotes the number of MCCs used to calculate average MCCs and CIs. See tables below for raw data (individual counts for CentroidAlifold(seed) and Afold).

^top





Performance of CentroidAlifold(seed) - scored higher in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for CentroidAlifold(seed)

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 355
Total TN 246097
Total FP 57
Total FP CONTRA 14
Total FP INCONS 26
Total FP COMP 17
Total FN 616
Total Scores
MCC 0.572
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.511 ± 0.096
Sensitivity 0.366
Positive Predictive Value 0.899
Nr of predictions 25

^top



2. Individual counts for CentroidAlifold(seed) [ download as .csv ]

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
2KX8_A 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 861 0 0 0 0 18
2LC8_A 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 1540 0 0 0 0 20
2WRQ_Y 0.24 0.12 0.50 2 2846 4 0 2 2 15
2ZZM_B 0.14 0.06 0.33 2 3480 4 0 4 0 30
2ZZN_D 0.47 0.22 1.00 6 2479 0 0 0 0 21
3A2K_C 0.46 0.21 1.00 6 2920 0 0 0 0 22
3A3A_A 0.85 0.73 1.00 27 3628 0 0 0 0 10
3AKZ_H 0.46 0.21 1.00 6 2695 0 0 0 0 22
3IVN_B 0.78 0.65 0.95 20 2325 1 1 0 0 11
3IYQ_A 0.52 0.39 0.70 37 60673 21 10 6 5 57
3IZ4_A 0.58 0.39 0.88 51 70818 7 2 5 0 81
3IZF_C 0.54 0.30 1.00 16 6887 0 0 0 0 38
3J3E_8 0.26 0.09 0.75 3 7499 1 0 1 0 30
3JYV_7 0.43 0.19 1.00 6 2844 0 0 0 0 26
3JYX_4 0.52 0.30 0.91 10 12235 3 0 1 2 23
3JYX_3 0.59 0.41 0.85 11 6315 5 0 2 3 16
3LA5_A 0.78 0.62 1.00 21 2464 0 0 0 0 13
3NPB_A 0.71 0.54 0.93 25 6994 4 1 1 2 21
3O58_2 0.65 0.42 1.00 16 7244 0 0 0 0 22
3O58_3 0.56 0.34 0.92 12 12390 1 0 1 0 23
3RKF_A 0.76 0.59 1.00 20 2191 0 0 0 0 14
3W3S_B 0.74 0.60 0.92 24 4727 3 0 2 1 16
3ZEX_D 0.60 0.37 1.00 18 7003 0 0 0 0 31
4A1C_2 0.46 0.24 0.89 8 11772 3 0 1 2 25
4ENB_A 0.65 0.42 1.00 8 1267 0 0 0 0 11

^top



Performance of Afold - scored lower in this pairwise comparison

1. Total counts & total scores for Afold

Total Base Pair Counts
Total TP 445
Total TN 245666
Total FP 456
Total FP CONTRA 66
Total FP INCONS 315
Total FP COMP 75
Total FN 526
Total Scores
MCC 0.495
Average MCC ± 95% Confidence Intervals 0.524 ± 0.107
Sensitivity 0.458
Positive Predictive Value 0.539
Nr of predictions 25

^top



2. Individual counts for Afold [ download as .csv ]

RNA Chain Rfam family MCC SENS PPV TP TN FP FP CONTRA FP INCONS FP COMP FN
2KX8_A 0.94 0.89 1.00 16 845 0 0 0 0 2
2LC8_A 0.61 0.55 0.69 11 1524 6 0 5 1 9
2WRQ_Y 0.57 0.59 0.56 10 2832 13 5 3 5 7
2ZZM_B 0.21 0.19 0.25 6 3462 18 0 18 0 26
2ZZN_D 0.80 0.74 0.87 20 2462 3 0 3 0 7
3A2K_C 0.41 0.39 0.44 11 2901 14 2 12 0 17
3A3A_A 0.84 0.70 1.00 26 3629 0 0 0 0 11
3AKZ_H 0.16 0.14 0.19 4 2680 17 2 15 0 24
3IVN_B 0.78 0.61 1.00 19 2327 0 0 0 0 12
3IYQ_A 0.31 0.34 0.29 32 60616 82 23 55 4 62
3IZ4_A 0.48 0.45 0.51 59 70760 58 11 46 1 73
3IZF_C 0.66 0.57 0.76 31 6862 10 1 9 0 23
3J3E_8 0.17 0.15 0.19 5 7477 31 2 19 10 28
3JYV_7 -0.01 0.00 0.00 0 2827 23 1 22 0 32
3JYX_4 0.31 0.30 0.31 10 12214 35 5 17 13 23
3JYX_3 0.54 0.56 0.54 15 6300 24 1 12 11 12
3LA5_A 0.78 0.62 1.00 21 2464 0 0 0 0 13
3NPB_A 0.74 0.61 0.90 28 6990 5 0 3 2 18
3O58_2 0.66 0.66 0.66 25 7222 14 4 9 1 13
3O58_3 0.34 0.34 0.34 12 12368 37 2 21 14 23
3RKF_A 0.76 0.59 1.00 20 2191 0 0 0 0 14
3W3S_B 0.50 0.45 0.56 18 4721 15 1 13 1 22
3ZEX_D 0.72 0.61 0.86 30 6986 5 0 5 0 19
4A1C_2 0.14 0.15 0.14 5 11745 43 5 26 12 28
4ENB_A 0.67 0.58 0.79 11 1261 3 1 2 0 8

^top


Matthews Correlation Coeffient, Sensitivity and Positive Predictive Value have been calculated based on the paper by Gardener & Giegerich, 2004.